Draft

Virtual Meeting of UNGEI Global Advisory Committee

Tuesday, 26 April 2011, 13:00 – 15:00 GMT

Meeting Report

The Global Advisory Committee (GAC) of UNGEI held a business meeting on 26 April 2011 to review the progress on the action points from the Paris meeting in January; the work of the working groups with the aim to determine how best to support the work at the country level;and to addresssome governance issues. Participants attended the meeting via TelePresence and WebEx. All documents for the meeting are available online at

  1. Introduction and review of action points from last business meeting

Chairing the session, Co-Chair Nitya Rao explained the order of meeting and handed requested the Secretariat to report on progress made on action points from the Paris GAC meeting. All action points were either completed or scheduled for discussion during this meeting exceptthe following:

  • UNGEI contribution to Global Action Week on women’s and girls’ education: Secretariat to develop by week of 2 May
  • Scheduling of in-person GAC meeting in late 2011: this is pending EFA calendar

The Secretariat also provided update on the progress of the Terms of Reference (TOR) for two consultancies:

  • Acandidate for Sport, Physical Education and Girls’ Educationhas been identified through a collaborative process by UNESCO, UNICEF and the Secretariat; recruitment is pending internal procedures.
  • The TOR for the GMR 2012 framework consultancy on Gender and Skills Development was advertised, and a candidate is expected to be selected in May and to begin work immediately. The consultant’s report will be shared with the GAC for comments before it is finalized and submitted to GMR team, which is aware of the calendar, by mid-July.
  1. Working Groups

Co-Chair Nitya reminded the gatheringof the GAC decisions at theJanuaryBusiness meeting:to strengthen its work at the global level through working groups(WG) and to assume an active role in promoting gender equality in education in selected countries. Four working groups (advocacy and communication, knowledge management, country processes, monitoring and evaluation) were established and generic TORfor the working groups were developed to guide their work. The GAC endorsed the TOR as presented.The meeting heard presentations from the WG chairs.

M&E Working Group (Chair: Nora Fyles)

  • The TOR has been useful in galvanizing the group and enabling it to focus on three areas for 2011: feedback to national partnership action plans, serving as a reference group to UNGEI evaluation, and finalization of the UNGEI monitoring and evaluation framework.
  • The evaluation is proceeding according to schedule for all partnerships except Egypt which has a slightly different time table due to lost time with the January revolution. Draft inception reports are in, and field work/visits have commenced. At global level, questionnaires have been sent to 44 countries, and a three-day workshop is planned in Montreal in June to synthesize the findings and draw preliminary conclusions.
  • The WG has also agreed to provide feedback on the work plans provided by the country partnerships – to give recognition to the work that is being done and highlight areas that could be strengthened, especially harmonization with the M&E framework.
  • The M&E framework will be updated as a result of the outcomes of the evaluation and the review of national partnership plans.
  • The WG will need a Management Response from the GAC (in July). Susan Durston (UNICEF) offered to share the UNICEF management response guidelines with the Group.

Knowledge Management (KM) Working Group (Chair: Emma Bluck)

  • The WG met and discussed its TOR; pending approval in light of the generic WG TOR.
  • The WG has also identified activities it plans to carry out with the help of a consultant that will assist the group in establishing aKM strategy;members commented on draft TOR for the consultancy, and recruitment is under way.
  • The Secretariat had also forwardedto the group the GEMInfo Business Plan from the East Asia-Pacific regional partnership, as requested by the plenary at the January meeting; as GEMInfo is more closely related to KM than M&E, the generic TOR provide for it to be included in the KM WG work plan.
  • Given its previous involvement with GEME, the M&EWG offered to provide comments on the GEMInfo Business Plan;EAPR region also agreed to share information from the extensive work the region has done on GEMInfo with the KM WG.

Advocacy and Communication Working Group (Chair: Adelaide Sosseh-Gaye)

  • The WG TOR was shared with the members for comments, and the group will share its work plan with the GAC before it is finalized.
  • This WG will work in synergy with the KM WG.
  • Questions needing decisions include: Who will be directly responsible for the actual advocacy?What should be the target groups? Who should finalize the events on the calendar of events/opportunities for UNGEI action? These will be taken up through a participatory process with the group members.

Country-Level Process Working Group (Secretariat presented). The UNGEI Secretariat presented on behalf of the WG as the group had not yet started its work.

  • At the Paris meeting, GAC requestedthe WG to identify a list of priority countries that could benefit from GAC support; UNGEI priority countries should take advantage of the new FTI priority on Girls’ Education at the interest of the FTI Secretariat to collaborate with UNGEI. GAC stopped short in Paris of determining the nature of its support.
  • The Secretariat developed an initial list of potential priority countries and shared with the Co-Chairs, who requested that the Secretariat develop a second set of countries based on broader criteria.The Secretariat explained the criteria used in establishing the two lists, detailed online.
  • A total of 22 countries were identified as core countries, were prioritized using the criteria for both lists and were considered a possible starting point for the WG once the nature of GAC support is agreed.
  • The Secretariat pointed to the document it developed which outlines ideas on how GAC member organizations can support country-level partnerships in priority countries.
  • Secretariat stated its intention to hand over this activity to the WG to carry it forward.

Ensuing discussions centered on the kinds of messages that UNGEI would convey at global meetings/events and the mechanisms for delivering such messages. It was noted that key UNGEI messages already exist (recommendations to WGEFA and HLG, Dakar Declaration, etc.) and that the Advocacy and Communication Working Group may only need to tailor the messages, in consultation with our Communication experts, to suit specific occasions. The meeting emphasized that the messages should address gender and education issues in a way that promotesthe partnership approach.

Co-Chair Malin Elisson, who chaired the session, asked the GAC members toreflect critically on the working groups since the bulk of UNGEI work would now be done within the WGs. Specifically, she asked the meeting to reflect onthe modality. The consensus was that:

  • The work of the Country Processes WG should be informed by the national level and not simply by global processes. We should consult countries about how GAC could support their work in collaboration with UNGEI Regional Focal Points (RFPs), whomust be represented in the WG. The WG needs to begin work immediately including the election of a chair and agreement on how to carry forward the work to date;
  • It is important for WGs to collaborate and share information among themselves as this will help to define their tasks in a clear and realistic way. A flow chart can help visualize this;
  • Existing key messages should be adapted to opportunities and eventsidentified by the Advocacy and Communication WG and should address gender and education issues in a way that promotesthe partnership approach;
  • The Secretariat should consult the FTI Secretariat in the discussion on priority countries;
  • Secretariat should circulate again to the GAC the WG TOR and WG membership.

Governance issues

The GAC unanimously approved the revised GAC Terms of Reference with the provision that the role of UNGEI RFPs be clearly articulated to reflect their role in strengthening country processes. The wording to this provision would be provided by Lucy Lake.

The Secretariat reminded the meeting that the tenure for the bilateral co-chair was drawing to an end and a new co-chair needed to be selected. Since the consultations with the bilateral groups were still ongoing, it was decided that the issues be deferred to the June GAC meeting, the date of which the Secretariat would communicate to the GAC.

Any other business

Prior to the close of the meeting, GAC members were asked to review and evaluate the appropriateness of the virtual meeting methodologyused for the GAC meeting to ensure that members were not left out for technical or other reasons. Secretariat agreed to prepare a summary of participation to reflect this information.

Action Points / Responsibility / Timeline
Circulate draft report on Gender and Skills Development for GAC’s comments when it becomes available / Secretariat / 15 July
Share UNICEF’s evaluation management response guidelineswith M&EWG / Susan / 6 May
Share comments on GEMInfobusiness plan with KMWG / M&EWG / 15 May
Share information on GEMInfo in EAPR with KMWG / RFP EAP / 15 May
Review existing UNGEI messages with view to adapting them for future use / Advocacyand Communication WG / 15 June
Recommendpriority countries for GAC focus in consultation with FTI Secretariat / Country Processes WG / ASAP
Circulate the WG TOR membership / Secretariat / 6 May
Prepare a flow chart to highlight the interconnectivity of WGs / Cisco and Secretariat / 31 May
Update GAC TOR on role of RFPs in strengthening country processes with wording provided by Lucy Lake / Secretariat / 6 May
Remind GAC of June meeting date / Secretariat / 6 May
Prepare report on participation of member in the virtual meeting / Secretariat / 6 May

****

Annex – List of Participants

Representative’s Name / GAC Member / Joining by / Location
May Rihani / AED / WebEx / Washington, DC
Lucy Lake / Camfed / TelePresence / London
Nora Fyles / CIDA / TelePresence / Ottawa
Emma Bluck / Cisco / TelePresence / Paris
Nitya Rao / Co-Chair/ASPBAE / TelePresence / London
David Wiking / Co-Chair/Sida / WebEx / Stockholm
Florence Malinga / Commonwealth Secretariat / TelePresence / London
Sally Gear / DFID / TelePresence / London
Sandra Barton / EFA-FTI / TelePresence / Washington, DC
Codou Diaw / FAWE / TelePresence / Geneva
Patrick Quinn / ILO / TelePresence / Geneva
BenteNilson / Norad / TelePresence / Oslo
Namtip Aksornkool / UNESCO / TelePresence / Paris
Changu Mannathoko / UNICEF / TelePresence / New York
Malli Kamimura / UNICEF-DOC / TelePresence / New York
Sonia Yeo / UNICEF-DOC / TelePresence / New York
Susan Durston / UNICEF / TelePresence / New York
Marc Regnault de la Mothe / WFP / TelePresence / Rome
FahmaNur / World Bank / TelePresence / Washington, DC
Alisa Phillips / World Vision / TelePresence / Washington, DC
Aster Haregot / RFP/UNICEF / WebEx / Brussels
Maki Hayashikawa / RFP/UNICEF / WebEx / Brussels
MoncefMoalla / RFP/UNICEF / WebEx / Amman
VanyaBerrouet / RFP/UNICEF / WebEx / Brussels
Cheryl Gregory Faye / UNGEI Secretariat / TelePresence / New York
Desmond Doogan / UNGEI Secretariat-DOC / TelePresence / New York
Odile Adechi / UNGEI Secretariat / TelePresence / New York
Shivangi Shrivastava / UNGEI Secretariat-DOC / TelePresence / New York

Page | 1